One God - One Message for all Mankind

Why should there be vast differences between religions where doctrines and dogma conflict and contradict if there is one god? Why should each religion forbid their followers to follow any other religion if there is one god? Why are the vast majority of religions geographically dominant if there is one god? Why are the creations stories of each religion so vastly different from one another if there is one god?

The questions can go on and on as to why the religious map of the world contradicts the concept of one god.

Surely you realize that this question has already been answered for you? Yesterday as a matter of fact. I refer to what Valerie F said when you asked nearly the same question yesterday:

Valerie F wrote:

Just because there may be only one God doesn't mean people can't have a wide variety of beliefs and opinions about God. There is only one you, assuming you even exist, and that doesn't keep people from having differences of opinion or holding contrary beliefs about you.

It was a fallacy and did not answer the question at all. All religions claim their doctrines contain the word of their ONE and only god, hence the word should be the same for all, yet they are vastly different.

You and I can read a poem and glean from it different meanings because we have two different sets of experience, two different mindsets. You and I can see a movie and each have our own experience of it. Where is the fallacy in saying that if there is one God, each person will have a different experience/understanding of it?

FYI - The Word of God. This has nothing to do with movies and poems to be critiqued. We're talking about one god who appears to give different messages to different people depending on where they are geographically.

True. The fallacies reveal themselves all on their own. If you don't know what fallacies are, I can provide a list for you.

I really don't care what millions of other people believe. Those are their beliefs, and I can still manage to respect people as individuals even when our beliefs don't match up. It's really not that difficult. *shrug* Why do you care? I concern myself with myself, and I assure you I've got plenty of better things to worry about than what religious book some dork on the other side of the world is reading/worshiping. It's none of my business, and it's none of yours.

You can be judgmental and condescending and play the run-around game all you want--all you're doing, by the rules of logic, is losing your own argument.

The translations/interpretation of the books is what is wrong with it. The books themselves are historical and mythological stories about humankind in general.

Some accounts in the bible can be used as a time-line for the evolutionary steps humankind made over the centuries. However, unlike most average people, I'm aware that there were a few people, within the translation/interpretation who were so far off base it wasn't even funny.

The primitive religious language that was developed as part of humankind growth was heavily based on "metaphors", for which, the language at the time, doesn't have words today to match. So, interpretation of previous words were substituted for newer words and put into vague context, so as to make people have to make a "leap of faith".

According to most religions, god controlled the given message. If the same god did this, then the messages would be the same, or at the very least, would hold the same values and functions. Discarding the basics such as thou shalt not kill which are obvious to everyone, they do not match up, excepting for where it is clear that one religion stole an idea from an earlier one, and even then they don't quite match.

So when you say all gods are the same, you're saying for example that the same god who told muslims to kill all nonbelievers is the same god who told christians that only believers in jesus christ would be saved, who is the same god who told the jews to NEVER believe in any other god but him, as all others would be false, and also taught them repeatedly to kill all the followers of other gods, who you would now wish us to believe would have been merely worshiping the jewish god but only from a different perspective.

It's a nice idea, your universal god, and I understand that believing in it saves your conscience the dilemna of worshiping a god that sends all others to hell, but when you really stop to look at it and follow the idea through, it doesn't even begin to work.

The only way it works is if you throw out all of the texts. Once you do that there isn't much of god left except for a wisp of a myth.

Personally, I'm for it! What an improvement. There's only one god, but we don't know a single darned thing about him (her/it/whatever). That'd be the trade-off.

You can have a universal god only if you throw out all the texts and systems and acknowledge that nobody knows anything about this universal god at all.

Once you do that, the word god loses all meaning.

So we may as well admit that there's no reason to believe in a god at all.

But the word has been filtered through human consciousness in every case. Humans are fallible and when they transmit a message, their choice of words is coloured by their own preconceptions and prejudices.

You are also assuming that every religion is based on a scripture which truly is the transmitted message of a divine being.

Today, if someone wrote a book which he claimed was the work of a divine being, we'd probably send him off for psychoanalysis. So we have to accept the possibility that some sects are built on a book written by someone with delusions of divine inspiration, who happened to live at a time when people were more gullible about such matters.

Twenty One, can you write this again in English? I can't respond to it because I can't understand a word of what you just said.

If you're saying it's hard for a human being to tell whether or not someone is deluded, that's exactly what I was saying. Therefore it is possible that some scriptures were written by someone who was deluded, not genuinely inspired.

The NTK syndicate. This is basically the argument that human consciousness is the NTK syndication. Humans -if you consider such things- since the moment they accepted a lesser ideology than what they were designed to be, have been enslaved by their own consciousness.

Humans were designed to be greater than their thoughts. Whereas their brains functioning automatically to do and be. Why? Because all necessary information was written into them. This allowed them to be free of necessity and the consideration of need. But, since man only considers his limitation as absolute, he is still a slave to his thoughts (consciousness). No matter how deep the rabbit hole goes -as people say, levels of consciousness- it all comes back to this point: we never NEEDED to know, because we already know.

In essence, humans are wasting their lives 'seeking' thought and 'higher levels' of thought instead of living free.

Think back to Noah's Ark and what happened after the flood. Everyone was building a tower to reach God, and what was God's response? To change tongues so nobody could communicate and the tower would not be finished. Over time the people went their separate ways, because they couldn't communicate with anyone else, and stories of how Earth came to be along with stories of who God actually is, became confused through translation until the written word came to be.

Sorry, but I don't buy that. It isn't convincing in the least considering that the confusion through translation could not have become so grossly misunderstood as to have so vastly different religions.

Of course, that doesn't explain the differences between Christianity and Islam, either.

My belief is - that is how the differences in religion began. I am sure there were people way back then who didn't want to believe in God either, just because of the fact - Who really knows? So, stories were made up rather than truth handed down. This is my belief - I do not agree with organized religion, but I consider myself a Christian.

No. You asked about One God = One Message. I am explaining my beliefs as to why there are so many religions in the world that don't agree.

Buddhist & Shinto & most of the other Asian religions seem to have nothing in common with Christianity - but do they? I feel they do. If not in Biblical Stories, (which they don't have) Then in basic teachings, such as: murder is wrong, theft is wrong, etc.

How is it that the entire world throughout history has the basic teachings of Christianity in common? I believe it's because they all originated in the same place & time.

Those traits have nothing to do with religions, they evolved along with mankind. What about all the other doctrines and dogma that conflict and contradict one another? What about the creation stories? What about prophets and messengers who reveal the word of god to mankind?

History would show that isn't the case, most religions supplant one another over time.

You think the Christian traits evolved with mankind? Where did they originate? How is it possible that all corners of the globe evolved to the same state at almost the same pace? Even in the newest tribe found in South America (?) (in 1980's I believe) have the basic teachings I am talking about. How, when, where, why did they learn them? How is it possible for them to know the basic laws of life if there hadn't been a common beginning?

It is not odd for me to think that we cannot decide for ourselves regarding murder. Why do you think laws were created? Because some people don't have a problem with murdering others while some people never have a murderous thought throughout their lives.

Ever have children? People aren't as horrible as religion would have you think they are. If Jesus existed, he was just another great philosopher, building on the philosophies of the ones who came before him. It's all any of the religions really are. Philosophies. Some stuff is right on target, other stuff has to get fixed by a new generation.

That's why even you wish to throw out parts of your bible, so that you can pretend there is a universal god.

There are no parts of the Bible I wish to do away with. But, there are parts I don't understand.

What does having children have to do with it? I taught my children according to my beliefs and discovered recently that one doesn't exactly believe in God. Children learn from their experiences in the world, they aren't born knowing.

Rafini, it seems that you get your beliefs from organized religion. Your tower of babel apologetics could come straight from a christian website.

Many people say they don't believe in organized religion, but their beliefs come straight from it. They may reject certain aspects of it, compromise others, but the core of their beliefs -(Jesus as savior, the bible as the "Word" of god)- comes straight from it.

The Bible is not organized religion. The tower of Babel is a story from the Bible, not from the Church.

Some of my beliefs come from organized religion, as I went to church throughout my childhood & teen years. As an adult, I have thought much about what I learned. I do not see the importance of Baptism or Communion. I feel faith & belief are enough - if I'm wrong, maybe I'll go to hell like the Catholics say I will.

I have to disagree. The Bible was created prior to the organized religion of Christianity, as it didn't exist until after Christ's death. The Jews followed the laws God had formed for them since the beginning of time, and those laws (along with historical events/stories) were recorded for the entire history of the people.

So, it seems to me it all comes down to whether or not you believe in God. I do.

Technically, the 'bible' and other ones just like it were never meant to be taken literally. Yes, I'll agree each are stories by other people...however, are you sure you have a grasp on where and what humankind was really doing at that time. Most of the things you'll find in any 'bible' are metaphorical and open to interpretation by others. If you have not a good understanding of ancient history, then other people's translation/interpretation of said book, you would have to accept. If you do not AGREE with organized religion, but consider yourself Christian, then I would say you are one seriously confused individual.

Because, you CANNOT be Christian, unless you follow Christian Religious Philosophy. So, please make up your mind whether or not, you are Christian.

As it stand right now, you have a belief in "GOD", but nothing to base that belief on, considering you do not follow Organized Christian Religious Philosophy.

I consider myself a Christian because I believe in God & Jesus Christ. As a Christian, I do not believe I have to subject myself to the confusion of organized religion when the Bible has everything I need to know.

When the man-made gods were created, humanity consisted of protectionist tribes, so these many man-made gods all have hateful language for peoples of other tribes following other man-made gods.

Because a few of these man-made gods have survived and some people still wish to rely on them today, they have had to come up with a way to reconcile the hateful language with today's more liberal viewpoints.

The solution is a universal god who damns none but loves and saves all. This philosophy allows people to cling to old man-made gods without feeling bad about themselves, so it is a popular philosophy.

The universal god solution only really works, however, if we reject portions of the texts. If we reject portions, we may as well reject the whole thing, and then there is no god left. That is the inevitable result of trying to claim a universal god which believers in a universal god simply don't want to admit.

Very funny. I seriously needed to think about it - I haven't been involved in religious discussions much in my life.

The hateful language, I assume, is posted below. I have to admit it is a portion I don't understand as to why it is a part of the Bible - unless it is meant figuratively (how many people today say "I'm gonna kill him" when all they want to do is put "him" in his place?)

As for rejecting portions of the text of the Bible, I can only assume you mean the change from following the Old Testament to the New Testament, per the teachings of Christ. That would take a lot of explaining.

That statement isn't true. The religious map of the world doesn't contradict the concept of one God.It does, however, when other religions like Islam and etc. are brought into it, contradict the concept of one TRUE God.Because God is not the author of the Islamic religion nor the other religions except Christianity.The Bible says there are "gods many", meaning that people worship many different "gods". You can make a leader your "god", you can make money your "god", you can make Satan or any other angel, fallen or not, your "god".

All other religions besides Christianity are simply feeble attempts to direct worship toward the wrong things.And even some sects of "Christianity" are that.

A little arrogant there. Christianity has become a cult larger than life. I believe in God and the message of the Christ but the Christian religion is not what was taught. So everyone except you and the cult you follow is going to HELL right?A little Judgmental too.

It means acknowledging that each person is a sinner, but that they can become children of God by believing that one person--Christ Jesus, a manifestation of God in the flesh-gave up His life so that we can be saved from eternal punishment if we choose Him.

When I talk about Christianity, it can mean either the "religion" of Christianity where there are those different denominations/doctrines, or it can mean pure Christianity (belief in Jesus Christ as Savior).

I think most of the world kinda lumps all Believers into "Christianity" even if they simply mean anyone who believes there IS a God as shown in the Bible.

I think there are probably very few Believers who really tout only pure Christianity because they get carried away into the denominational doctrines.

I think we would all be on the same page if we just sat down with one big, large and industrious chocolate bar. I know I'd love to preach a sermon atop such a structure. Heck, let all of us dance on the sucker. When done, we shall feast with smiles.

and cultural interpretation makes the God point seem different, but in reality, at the deepest spiritual level, the unity can be perceived by those of a heart of love and true desire to have that unity

This question means nothing to me.What the hell is this god thing?If it's just an imagined super entity, why should "it" be considered at all?Can one consider "zilch" to be anything other than "zilch?"

I think some of these clowns will consider anything, if it consists of them gaining special rights at some man-made magic kingdom - while, in their minds, our asses will be eternally burning in their deepest, darkest pits of insane thoughts that leads to the glowing, bright fire pits full of asininity. Ouch!

Fair enough. That said, can we then dispose of all scriptures as being false?

Of course, if they were taken out of context, why were they written down by men who were supposedly "inspired" by their god, and claimed to be the words of a god? All followers of any particular religion will most certainly be adamant about that.

Speaking of one God... To me it all depends on what you are looking for. If you hadden noticed each religious beliver are in fact superstitious. As great as each religion is they all can get there responses from the higher one. Come together get along and compramise. At the end of your journey you must get along or not? its up to you. Yall are argueing. Please no confrontations.

Bad spelling indicates a low reading ability - some people who struggle to read are in awe of the words themselves - imagine thinking that you have all your answers in a box and you can't read them. The bit they can understand is 'and the word was made god', so they are worshipping the word. kinda missing the point of the words though. How are you today Hokey?

That's the problem though, each religion gets very different responses from their "higher one", shouldn't every religion be taught the same things? Hence, it is these differences that cause people to be confrontational, to hate each other because they are not of the same religion.

The answer is as everyone knows is that there have been many false prophets that lead people astray; ...as Jesus foretold.

Many coming in his name. Jesus revealed in 96 AD to John that there will be/(WAS) an orgaiization that compelled the inhabitence of the earth to follow it. And it spawned many ofspring.

There is only one truth and 10,000 diffrent variations of that truth. To change the truth just a little bit in a variety of diffrent ways. To each their own. 98% true = false teachings. All of them have one thing in common. They preach pastence as if to be futuristic. As long as we continue running around that flag pole???we accomplish nothing. Thus the confusion continues.

We don't say like that; we say that every Revealed Religion; Judaism, Christianity,Buddhism, Hinduism, Zoroastrians were truthful in their origin but when they deviated from the truthful path of their truthful founders i.e., path of Moses,Jesus, Buddha, Krishna and Zoroaster their followers became untruthful.

To say that every written thing that survives from the past is a lie is clear rubbish.

They wrote loads of stuff and some of what they wrote was what they believed - and part of this is simple social behaviour issues. But even finding the stuff that was actually written is hard enough as it has been translated many times and each time the translator had a vested interest in making it tell his or her own story.

I have an interest in the 'Tao de Ching' or book of morals of Taoism, teh philosphy not the religion. It has been banned and hidden for centuries, translated in a few different chinese languages over time and now into English. Despite all this it holds together really well, partly because it is in poetic form. The few verses where the meaning is transparently clear - with what we know today - have the point or idea it is expressing bang on right.

I do not in all honesty KNOW that Abraham met a God. I do not believe that mankind is at the top of the totem pole in the universal scale. I know that there is a spiritual realm that we know very little about because I have experienced just a small portion of it. To believe that a man (Abraham) came as face to face with a spiritual being that represented himself as GOD is not hard for me to believe. Religion however is a different matter. It at come point came under the control of corrupted individuals. This was the message that Jesus taught, (the Messiah as foretold.

And Religion has been interpreting not only his message, but all of written scripture. There is no salvation to be gained by following a Church.

Don't get me wrong. I believe that in many cases a church is necessary in introducing people to "GOD" Kinda like a dating service that introduces a man and a woman. A blind date sorta speak. Then, that relationship must mature on it's own. Those two should not LOVE the dating service. If things go right they will love each. When we begin to love the dating service too much the relationship can not mature into what it was intended.

Further to this, why do religionists always reflect the place they are living in their beliefs? If you were bought up in Afghanistan you are a lot more likely to believe in Allah, in America a christian god.Why do the religions reflect the culture?

Religions are for human beings; so very naturally they have to be a part of human culture;what make you to think negatively, my Skeptic friend. Truthful Religion confirms Truth; as they have no contradictions;rather they support one another, therefore.

there is nothing called truthful religion..all religions have bit of truth in it..problem happens when people clinch to everything which has been said and written in religion and then form their truth out of it..this truth differs from other's definition of truth and so issues..religion is not natural , spirituality is ..founders of religion tried to answer spiritual questions using religion..since answers matched at some places and differed at some , issues have occured and would keep on occuring since there wont be single definition..

We can make a statement in answer to a particular question, and it may be true. But when that truth is applied to another topic it can no longer be said to have any truth in it.??? For this reason we can not pick and choose whatever verses of scripture that seems to meet our needs at the time.

Until then we continue picking and choosing whatever verses seem to meet our needs at the time.

I can understand that. Just because Religion has gotten so big that it has blocked our view of God does not negate the possibility of there being one.

As I have been saying ever sense I got on HP that No one can have any idea as to what scripture is saying until we first understand prophesy. If our understanding of prophesy is false then our understanding of ALL of scripture is false.

The reality of that should be clear.??But for some reason "RELIGION" doesn't agree?It seems that the more different interpretations there are the better????

All the truthful religions have been revived in Quran; so one who believes in it and puts a wreath on what he believed previouly; in this sense does not change his faith/religion, rather he confirms his truthful founders of his religion.

There is not a single truthful teachings in the previous religions which has not been inculded in Quran. And Quran mentioned it:

[2:106] They who disbelieve from among the People of the Book, or from among those who associate gods with Allah, desire not that any good should be sent down to you from your Lord; but Allah chooses for His mercy whomsoever He pleases; and Allah is of exceeding bounty. [2:107] Whatever Sign* We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, We bring one better than that or the like thereof. Dost thou not know that Allah has the power to do all that He wills?

You know this could very well be.________________________________________________________________________However, whose to say that the different religions are not intertwined, or related? They could be you know. It could be that the vast majority of people out there who claim to be religious, just choose to ignore it.

Agnostic point of view: there is no need for god to send prophets for any message to species living on planet earth which is in solar system GA-HA12345 which is at right corner from god's left hand side. if any entity which creates species/planets/universe with one big-gangbang then it will hardly care for or think about protection of his creation, he can create, delete and reinstall whenever he wishes to. one holy message for humanity is just whitenoise/garbage cosmic noise that human consciousness receives while trying to interpret cosmic bang noises as message from god.why that entity will even bother to waste time with ants in some planet ?

If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or your intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kill him. Your hand shall be the first raised to slay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to death, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slavery. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such evil as this in your midst. (Deuteronomy 13:7-12 NAB)

There is and always has been One God with one message...LOVE..love of self and others..It is the only thing that will keep us from committing murder, stealing, lying.etc.The law is a guide but the law does not convict.nor refrain...it is Love..

Deborah, you too have missed the point of my inquiry. There are many messengers and prophets from Moses to Christ to Muhammad to John Smith, all providing the "Word of God" as revealed to them, yet they are vastly different words. Kapeesh?

Well it is more like, those books assume god exist then layout things/plans to worship him and how to please him and get salvation etc. Love is bait used by religious people/books, and the way they market their religious efforts if you disagree with them you're nihilist or don't understand love. Love has to be religious & must stick to their definition.

Religious books are perfect sales copy book, just read bible/quran/geeta, in these books writer know where to trigger and how to create crowd around belief. if you disagree with writer then point is that you didn't read the book and if you read it then you've to agree with it. Quran expects person to be islamic else he/she is kafir and will be tested on judgment day, but it failed to write why god made people born in another religion(answer would be karma lol). same is the case with Christians but Christians allow conversion policy to escape hell.Religion preach love cause every human wants to be loved in some part or somewhere in life, religion just tries to find where to hit the person so that person becomes religious.

I didn't show you any disrespect..so I expect the same from you...Kapeesh?

All of them had the same message..Love...First there was no law...so everyone did what they wanted..the law told us of LOVE...no murder..honor..no stealing..these are all based on LOVE...but the law..showed how people broke the law..so the law was done away with where love is present..if we love than the law has no affect on us..only those who break the law are under the law..If we love..the written law is not needed..this has always been the message..it is you who does not understand...but again even in the law that is love..people misunderstand..and don't show love..it is because they don't love themselves that they can't love others...The world would be perfect if everyone had love in their hearts..put away the EGO..ascend their minds...

Just because you don't agree with me does not mean I didn't understand.

Stop taking things out of context. I notice you do that a lot..I said"Most religions today..especially those of the Christian religions So I wasn't saying one religion. Can you read?. Don't get mad, because you misquoted me on purpose so you have this coming to you..Now the rest of what I said.. have misunderstood the message Yah Shua gave..they also use the written law and judge others instead of loving people...they allow their EGOS to control them..ie..they think only they hold the truth and everyone else is not enlightened...(arrogance) They constantly tell everyone to come to God..through Christ..in essence they think everyone else needs to change except them..(Judgment)..They reject those who do not believe as they do (lack of love and compassion)..

They worship Christ instead of God.....They only focus on Christ..because they think he IS God...which is not what Christ taught...But it is because they misinterpret..the message."

I think it is like talking to a brick wall Deb. You cannot start a thread Q, ask a question to people then jump down everyone's throat. I am going to stay out of this thread. I believe everyone is entitled to their own opinion and how they say things without ridicule or criticism.

You're right.Plus he takes part of what was said and ignores the rest. When quoting someone he is suppose to include the entire quote and not a sentence. He is like a movie that keeps being rerun on TV. It gets very tiresome.

He is dangerous because he takes parts of a Quote and tries to make it appear it is all you said. That's why there are laws against misquoting.This type of person is an instigator who tries to stir up problems with one person or group with another.

I guess this proves that there is only one God--a God of love, that is:

Suppose a man or woman among you, in one of your towns that the LORD your God is giving you, has done evil in the sight of the LORD your God and has violated the covenant by serving other gods or by worshiping the sun, the moon, or any of the forces of heaven, which I have strictly forbidden. When you hear about it, investigate the matter thoroughly. If it is true that this detestable thing has been done in Israel, then that man or woman must be taken to the gates of the town and stoned to death. (Deuteronomy 17:2-5 NLT)

Yes..once the law came..those who did bad things stuck out like a sore thumb..those who went by the written law only..and did not have love..used these laws to punish and control the ones who broke the written law..because they did..they were worse than the others...so this is why Love is now and always has been the law...The written books show us how we went from ungrateful..to written law breakers..and than the answer on how to not break the law..which is through love...

Deut. is not showing us how to react but how NOT to react...Once they received the ten commandments as written law..it was abused..by mankind..this is how mankind used the law to control others..and reminded the Law breakers that God had given these laws..You know..ABUSE of power...so in the New Testament Yah Shua is saying..as long as we LOVE we will not harm anyone or anything because our hearts will have pity on all others..Therefore we will not break any law...

In my travels, I have met Buddhists, Hindu, followers of Islam, Wicca’s and others who are as sincere about their religions as Christians are. I am a Christian. If asked to prove that God exists in a way that would make none believers believe, I cannot. I have found good in other religions and do not believe that they are going to hell because they do not believe the way I do. The ultimate responsibility for the destiny of our lives rests with us. One can choose to allow God to lead his or her life. They can choose to strive toward his or her goals alone or with the help others offer freely. To debate faith is fruitless. We can only search inside ourselves for the answers you seek in this discussion.

Most religions today..especially those of the Christian religions have misunderstood the message Yah Shua gave..they also use the written law and judge others instead of loving people...they allow their EGOS to control them..ie..they think only they hold the truth and everyone else is not enlightened...(arrogance) They constantly tell everyone to come to God..through Christ..in essence they think everyone else needs to change except them..(Judgment)..They reject those who do not believe as they do (lack of love and compassion)..

They worship Christ instead of God.....They only focus on Christ..because they think he IS God...which is not what Christ taught...But it is because they misinterpret..the message.

Cagsil said .. The translations/interpretation of the books is what is wrong with it. Very True

Deborah said ... Most religions today..especially those of the Christian religions have misunderstood the message They worship Christ instead of God..... Very True

Rafini said ... I consider myself a Christian because I believe in God & Jesus Christ. As a Christian, I do not believe I have to subject myself to the confusion of organized religion when the Bible has everything I need to know.

I agree completely ... Then all that is required for us to do is to learn all over again how to read. Read uninfluenced by the confusion and contradictions that various organised churches have been teaching through the ages.

These also are exerts from my hub that I just started this AM... I am pleased that you already agree with some of the things that are in it.

And yes, God did influence some of those religions (or at least the belief in God did) but God didn't condone the establishment of those religions; except for Judaism, and that religion quickly became twisted because it became based on legalism, not Spirit.

Is that a fact? I happen to be Jewish.I understand that Christians think if they read anything but the KJV of the Bible they are SINNING, but before you belittle others and their beliefs please read this: it will explain a lot. http://74.125.47.132/search?q=cache:h0L … &gl=us

I was speaking in one post about your insult of Jewish people, trying to make yourself better. In the other post I gave you a link as to why Jews do not believe in your Christian religion. I knew you wouldn't read it.

But it's just a fact that MOST of us will die an earthly death and be buried or cremated or whatever......

Are you saying only those who have true Faith will escape earthly death, like Elijah and Enoch?

Are YOU and others of your religion believing that you'll be translated like Enoch without ever fulfilling the natural law which the Bible says "it's appointed once unto man to die, and after that the judgement"?

Again, I have absolutely NO religion. Those of 'us' who have both read & lived, agree that what Y`shua did, said applies exactly and directly to every single human being post-resurrection. There is much to explain but this is not the space-place.

Yes, those who actually live by True Faith -not doctrine-church-book faith will escape both physical and spiritual death.

The reference to Enoch, Elijah and especially Y`shua is expressly this: we have a choice to have eternal life and have it more abundantly. More proof: Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-Nego -thrown into a furnace (1,000 degrees + , not not even the smell of ash on them. John boiled in oil, yet not so much as a mark. Peter walking on water just like Y`shua, Peter who's SHADOW retored a mans crippled from birth. Cornelius -being without the law, anointed with the Spirit- not only him but his entire household -brothers, mom, cousins, even his slaves!

All of these are proof we are to be exactly as He is. Else, the point of salvation is moot. He even said so. That the works He did -we would do even greater works if we just believe it and act upon it. This is what separates religion from Faith. While millions of believers and jewish leaders are waiting for the coming of Y`shua, we understand the fullness of the word & Testimony is the Spirit in us -that SAME spirit that hovered over creation, the breath breathed into us, the same who raised the manifest Will of Elohim from the grave and came upon those in Jerusalem.

The people of Israel were God's people; Jesus was a Jew. God sent His message down that line.But even today, there are Jews who do not recognize Jesus as the Christ.So they will be lost just as surely as other non-Believers if they don't accept Christ as Savior.

Assumption that they were sent by god. I asked for proof didn't asked for another assumption. Again how can you validate they were sent by god ? by checking that they were mortal and hence they were god sent ?

The root of religion springs from the concept of GOD. Hence, if you want to know why there are so many differing versions of messages from One God, then you have to analyze the concept of GOD first. Before discussing about the main topic, let’s take a look about this GOD concept:

1.Being unaware of the nature of God, it would be unwise to claim there is only one God, or two, or many. If you say god is energy, then we can not conclude there is only one God. I.e. we never say it’s an electricity, a gravity or a light because of their infinite nature.

2.Even if there is a God, considering his/her absolute knowledge, unlimited power and perfect state; theres no doubt that his/her judgment has to be perfectly unbiased & all his subjects has to be equally loved by him vis-à-vis everyone would be given equal opportunity, equal right & equal love. Now if God chooses a messenger, or a prophet among us, he or she will be presented with more opportunity & higher status than the rest of us. However, that would mean biasness also exists in the realm of God, making the messenger concept flawed & unacceptable.

Universe is a closed system, where we live in. Nothing comes in or goes out from it. Even if there’s a GOD, that being will not interfere with the on going equation, considering that his/her interference might create imbalance in the equilibrium of harmony.

Now let’s get back to the main topic. There exist thousands of religions throughout the world. And there are many which don’t exist anymore. Some of them are similar in nature while others are completely different. Humans possess a tendency to modify these doctrines based on the flaws of previous doctrines. If you go through the abrahamic religions, you will find that Judaism, Christianity & Islam are just the updated versions of the previous script, emerged from the flaws of the other and It’s not the differing versions of one message from one god. For instance:

1.Judaism prophesized the coming of a savior but they did not realize that any one can claim to be a savior and later on he/she might change the script itself & write a new one, thus threatening the existence of the religion.

2.Christianity realized the problem and took Christ one step above all human being by calling him the son of god. So that even if a messiah comes in the future, he/she will never be able to take his place. But there was a loop hole.

3.Islam understood the loophole & took a brilliant step. It claimed that no man can be a god or similar to him. Both Judaism & Christianity is a distorted form of Gods message. They also realized the problem of future messiahs and decided to call Muhammad as the final prophet. Any one who would claim to be a prophet after the death of Muhammad, would be an imposter, thus securing the future of Quran.

There are plenty of such modifications that can be found among abrahamic religions. Now when you will go through the major eastern religions, you will observe the similarities & such modifications among Hinduism, Budhdhism & Jainism. Same applies for religions that developed in ancient America or in ancient middle-east. Since at that time communication was underdeveloped people did not have clear view of what’s happening on the other parts of the globe. Thus creating series of developments in their religions, limited in geographic or regional boundaries.

Thus, these are not different versions of One Message from One God; rather these are just updated versions or modifications. These modifications are still going on and will never stop. Some do the modifications in the name of interpretation (by interpreting the text in a new way) while others are trying to crossbreed religions and establishing new ones like : Chrislam.

1. Hinduism, Jainism and Buddhism emphasize the illusory nature of the world and the role of karma in keeping men bound to this world and the cycle of births and deaths.

2. According to the Buddha, desire is the root cause of suffering and removal of desire results in the cessation of suffering. Some of the Hindu texts such as the Upanishads and the Bhagavadgita consider doing actions prompted by desire and attachment would lead to bondage and suffering and that performing actions without desiring the fruit of action would result in liberation

3. All three religions believe in the concept of karma, transmigration of souls and the cycle of births and deaths for each soul

4. All three believe in certain spiritual practices like meditation, concentration, cultivation of certain bhavas or states of mind.

5. All originated and evolved on the Indian soil, thus having the similarities & was modified based on the flaws of others

Modifications:

There are several modifications. The following can be considered as the major one:

In the caste system of hindu society, the teachings of buddha released the people from the oppression of tradition and orthodoxy. It also created hope and aspiration for those who had otherwise no hope of salvation and freedom of choice (specially for the lower class hindus)

Very nice. Just checking. Some people post without knowing what they are talking about. Buddhism allowed the people to have their own interpretation of God or the God concept. The kind of world the Buddha was born into was magical. Everything seemed to be alive. The trees, mountains, lakes, and sky were living and breathing with a variety of gods in charge. If you needed rain you asked one god, if you needed it to stop raining you asked another. The priests of India did all the religious work, and got paid for it. Even all the gods in India could not end the suffering of one human being. In the religion of Buddhism we don’t have a first cause, instead we have a never ending circle of birth and . In this world and in all worlds, there are many beginnings and ends. The of life used in Buddhism has no starting place... It just keeps going and going.Now having said that... If you’re a Buddhist it’s OK to believe God was the first cause... It really doesn't go against the teachings of the Buddha, his focus was on suffering... It's also OK to believe science has the answer… Like the big bang theory, etc... Some Buddhist’s don’t even care how it all started, and that’s fine too. Knowing how the world started is not going to end your suffering, it’s just going to give you more stuff to think about. I hope you can see that God is not what Buddhism is about... Suffering is... And if you want to believe in God, as some Buddhists do, I suppose it's OK. But, Buddhist's don't believe God can end suffering. Only the teaching's of the Buddha can help us end suffering through wisdom and the activity of compassion. In his whole life and in all his teachings the Buddha never said anything about the One God of the desert.

Religion (on the surface) is a device created by a populace seeking to bring people together and help them live in harmony.

When early man went from hunting and gathering to farming communities they had to keep the peace among them somehow and religion filled the gap by providing a code all could live by, and punishments from which none could escape. With early man living an average lifespan of 35 years they needed every advantage they could get to survive, and not squabbling among themselves (and killing one another) was a good start.

Thus, Gods were created to explain all we could not understand and to provide order. And to simplify things ... overt time ... many religions reduced themselves down to believing in one god. The Egyptians are a fine example, as they had a pantheon of gods, and yet, many pharaohs decreed that there people should only worship one god, such as the sungod.

By organizing people within religion one creates order and order is needed to hold society together, but how do we explain the similarities in doctrine throughout the many religions of the world?

That's as easy one! As we started out as hunter/gatherers, we learned early on as a species that working together helped us to survive. Over time, we were rewarded by social behaviors (more food, better protection) and punished for individual and selfish acts. As such, we learned that 'social' was better and passed this knowledge onto each generation.

So, why can't the other animals do this? Two words ... 'limited vocab'. Our ability to speak is HIGHLY underrated. Speech allows one generation to pass on all important knowledge from one generation to the next and often this knowledge was passes on as stories to make it more interesting (and better learned) by the next generation.

So to speak, if Ug tell Og fire burns he's kinda inviting Og to find out for himself. Whereas, if Ug tells how someone else placed their hand in the fire and smoldered into a pile of ashes, Og might not be so likely to relive that experience ... regardless of the truth involved. The worst-case scenario (story) offers the lesson better. Thus, if we misbehave, an ultimate being will punish us.

And back in those day, with an average lifespan of 35 years, not many men lived long enough to question all of this. After all, they were adults for merely 15 years, and most of that was spent performing backbreaking labor. It's only just recently that we now regularly live onto our 60s and 70s, finding more time for us to question all that we were taught. And when we start examining the evidence, it doesn't all add up.

For instance, why does a supreme being demand obedience then allow us to do as we please? Is it because we are being given a choice? If so, what's the point of punishing someone for a choice you offered them?

To put this whole thing in perspective, here's my experiment:

Eight test subjects in a closed room. They are told there is an invisible bowl in the room and they must guess its location. Each time they guess wrong they are zapped.

Outside the room stands a scientist. This scientist is god for this experiment and provides the jolting shocks. Behind him are several other scientists feeding in different coordinates of the invisible bowl. Sometimes they are right and sometimes they are wrong. As only the primary scientist actually knows the location of the bowl, the others can't be certain, but he does tell the other scientists when he has moved the invisible bowl.

The goal of each lesser scientists is to guess correctly where the invisible bowl is so they can say they know more about god's decisions than the others, and in doing so, they are seeking converts to their belief. However, they truly have no clue where the invisible bowl really is. Their just guessing, based on information gathered from prior failures - and hoping to be right often enough to gather converts.

This is the true perception of all religions as not one of them can fully guarantee they are correct, and yet they continue to do so. They believe, through many years of wading the waters, that they have figured everything out and then allow their people to wander into the room and hopefully not get zapped by the teachings.

However, there is no spoon, just like there is no invisible bowl. But let's remember that the primary purpose of religion (which is often convoluted)is to allow societies to form and live in harmony.

And so, is there a god? As with the experiment with the invisible bowl .. if you believe the invisible bowl exists then you have given it an existence. It might exist only within your mind and only where you perceive it as being, but for you, the bowl truly exists. But does this make it exist for others? Only if they chose to believe as you do.

And that succinctly answers the whole 'is religion right or wrong debate'. For each individual, the faith they choose (or lack thereof) is their invisible bowl. And the fact that they accept that invisible bowl exists, even if they refuse to accept it as being a god, is the stuff religion is made out of.

Simply said ... it is whatever we care to believe it is, but that mental creation does not project beyond our own body unless someone willingly shares in the same vision. That's the ultimate truth of God and all religions.

I don't know if you felt it or not but I was feeling a bit sarcastic that day and I apologize. To sum up a very long story into a short answer as to why Christianity has so many Denominations-Interpretations-diffrent beliefs etc is because the canon was put together in such a way as to create division all in the name of unification. CONUNDRUM

Ah, but it's the reason for the similarities that explains the differences. For you see, early man was always on the move and he took his knowledge with him. However, separation, over time, produces differences. For instance, discounting the Aborigines, the people of Australia are basically descendants of former English criminals sent there to serve a life sentence. For you see Australia was originally a penal colony for England.

And what does this have to do with anything? Simply this ... over time, the Australian culture shifted a bit from the English culture, and all in less than 300 years. Now, imagine the differences that would emerge in several thousands of years.

The message is always evolving, so when it moves onto different lands the message takes a different direction. Also, as stated earlier, some people choose to change the doctrine because they discover flaws with the old doctrine. Remember, it's all about gaining converts, and sometimes a change in doctrine does just the trick.

Going back to the shock experiment I posted earlier in this thread ... what if one of the lesser scientists discovered that the invisible bowl was typically in the front left corner of the room? If he passed this information on and his converts benefited then they would (themselves) bring in other converts. This is basically 'conversion through a prophet' whereas one subject seems to have a divine link with god that benefits him and others, and therefore, he forms a following as such knowledge is advantageous to others.

And as people went about finding better doctrines, some converted and some held fast to the older beliefs. Each newer belief system offers some improvement over the older ones, but there will always be those who resist change.

Mix in several thousands of years worth of new religious ideas and you have many paths to follow. For an excellent view at the seed in action, read up on Catholics, Lutherans, Protestants, and Methodists. See just how alike they are - and yet - how so different. Investigate what was going on in the world as each denomination first emerged. From this you will see why there is such splintering in religion today, and the example I just gave you are three offshoots of Christianity, whereas there are many more: Baptist, Mormon, Presbyterian, etc.

And so, all religions are divergent in nature because they evolve to become something better to gather in converts or because they stand fast to their beliefs and refuse to change. Regardless, religion is a man-made thing and anything man makes that serves a purpose is retooled and evolved over time.

If religion didn't serve a useful purpose it would have been discarded long ago. And while many see religion as control (which it can be) it also serves as a method of bringing about order (provided religion is wielded as a method of guidance and not a tool of subjugation).

Religion ... in and of itself ... is not a bad thing. It only gains a good or evil tint from how we apply it.

No, I disagree with the new age as well, science makes a lot of claims they don't know to be absolute while also not making claims that are absolute like consciousness being the key of evolution. They refer to consciousness as a mechanism rather than conscious reactions to the environment. Both religion and science take religious faith to believe as absolute.

Why does there have to be a title or name for a persons belief that doesn't agree with science or religion as absolute? When giving it a title or a name, it starts to resemble a religion within itself. Also, the titles have bad karma, people usually make and draw assumptions just from the title before even writing. A title is "materialistic". I give a little more credit to science over religion simply for running most experiments to base the evidence. Religion/faith is belief without need for evidence.

lol, And what is your idea of rising above the human consciousness? Your consciousness wants to title everything which causes the separation and is part of the problem. The condition is attachment and dependency on the materialistic for stimulation.

I think free will is another hoax. What is free will? Living under a government isn't free will. Is belief free will? Belief comes from previous influences on most occasions. Some children are raised to be racist, this isn't free will. What is free will to you?

Most people thinkGreat good will come from the skiesTake away everythingAnd make everybody feel highBut if you know what life is worthYou would look for yours on earthAnd now you've seen the lightYou stand up for your rights

That makes no sense. If that were the case, why do those religions forbid their flock to follow any other religion? Why are creation stories so vastly different? Why does one religion say to do something one way and another religion says to do it the opposite way?

These are supposed to be the divine words of god as told by prophets and messengers, yet they contradict each other. How does one explain that?

Donotfear, that picture you posted of church lady, as I remember, it was a Saturday Night live skit. I'm I right Donotfear? In any case, Dana Carvey is sure to make you laugh as the chruch lady. Thanks Donotfear.

Twenty One Daysposted 9 seconds agoin reply to thisQuantus Philo: the smallest measurable or immeasurable instance of being the greatest expression of purity: free will.Free Will: "It is not necessary to consider a question, nor its opposite an answer. Both are the base relative parallels of the Need To Know syndication, defined as consciousness"

Free will isn't always pure, if there was absolute free will, there would be no punishment for crimes, there would be no such thing as crime. Do you think a child rapists free will is pure? Even consciousness is not free will, some people with mental disorders have limited free will than those without mental disorders. Considering the questions and answers are part of the need to know that grows consciousness.

Free Will is only impure when pulled into the consciousness.In and of itself, Free Will has no need, like 'faith' or 'love'.

Certainly. Consciousness is NOT free. In fact consciousness is the farthest thing from freedom; the slave master of men.

The consciousness does not 'grow', though both parallels do elevate the notion. Consciousness is finite, because ALL necessary information exists within each and every human being. Perhaps some have/have not indulged all such notions/data, but it does not mean it is not there. it simply means all that thought is either dormant or satisfied -to any degree- within the parallel.

Free will needs consciousness to exist. What is a persons free will that is in a coma? Do they have free will to enjoy life? If you agree that consciousness isn't free, then free will isn't free since you have to be conscious to believe in free will. How is consciousness a slave master? Consciousness is what allows you to be alive and have an idea of it being a slave master. Consciousness is infinite, there are no known limits to consciousness. The only limit is yourself when you think it has limits.

Sorry, 21, but we can't close the gap between being human and being "God".......We are, and always will be (while our physical bodies are alive) humans subject to God's power.

....There are many things that happened in the Bible that I believe were manifested in order to initiate the message of the Lord. Speaking in tongues was one. Peter walking on water was one. The three Hebrews in the fiery furnace was one.

Tell me, what would most people DO with the power to walk on water? What would they do with the power to pick up a real poisonous serpent and get bitten and not be affected by it?

...Jesus came to Spiritualize the plan of God, to make a Spiritual way to be saved instead of a literal way.

Else, the temptation for us to think we ARE "God" or "gods" would be too great.

Man keeps wanting to achieve godly things.

Let me remind you that God confused the languages of the people who sought to reach Heaven via the Tower of Babel.Let me remind you that the glory for all power is to be given to the Lord, not to humans.

There are some things we don't "need to know", 21.There are some things we weren't meant by God to do.

this is foolishness, Brenda. If any man thinks he is Elohim, he is -IMO- blind.By who, but Him can we be elohim (note the small 'e').Perhaps you are confusing my statements with those of the religions of the new age? contrary.Just because i accept my place as a son of elohim, and all its fullness, does not mean I consider myself the Creator.

But again, this is the lie Adam accepted -that he could be equal to Elohim, and so gave up all the power of the Spirit, even his own life and became a slave to that consciousness(sin).

This was the sin at its root: questioning how awesome he was made and accepting he needed to be more than 2nd to none. He was the perfect MIRROR IMAGE of all the Creator is. All of it!This is why all of heaven was awestruck by man. This is why angels served adam and why lucifer was enraged with jealousy, envy.

What bothers me is even knowing that great Grace & salvation -billions have fallen into the same old pattern of cry-fry, turn-burn, the oh I'm not worthy nonsense.He specifically states we have been made worthy, made righteous -because of Y`shua. To deny this is to deny salvation, the work of Y`shua and that Spirit of Testimony. It is to crucify Him again and again.

ummm...no; Adam sinned because of his disobedience to God, plain and simple. And therefore lost his ability to live forever in the flesh.... That's why we'll all die a physical death at our appointed time. It's not crucifying Him again!Crucifying Him again would be to say He's still flesh Himself.Salvation is about recognizing His Holiness, and that the only way we can be Holy to any extent is because we have His Spirit inside us when we choose to accept Him.

really?Then the cross & resurrection is pointless.If all are to die in the flesh, no matter sin or not, the need for a Resurrected Savior would then be null/void. The Law would still be in effect. The sacrifice in effect. The Anointing pointless. The examples of physical men and righteousness pointless.

I am not at all surprised at the misled churchianity with regard to sin. Sin is simply accepting less than who we are and not walking in the Spirit.

The effects of sin are everything ranging from death to sickness, murder to fear. Under Grace, there is no sin. Grace is faith full.

BTW, as for that passage in the letter to the Romans: the rest of the line reads:

Yet Elohim, with undeserved kindness, declares that we are righteous. He did this through Y`shua Moshiach when he freed us from the penalty for our sins.

so, either A: Y`shua never really removed ALL sin and effects on our behalf -which nullifies salvation and the need of- and everyone is dead anyway or B We have life eternally and abundantly in body, mind & spirit. Else, healing-pointless, renewing of the mind-pointless, your church, emm, pointless?!

Are you saying that any Believer who dies a natural death wasn't walking in the Spirit and is unsaved and going to the lake of fire? Oh wait....you don't believe there's a "hell" or lake of fire where sinners are punished, do you?

Anyway....let me ask you this----have YOU ever healed anyone?Have you ever resurrected someone from the dead?Can YOU walk on water?Do you think you're not subject to dying a natural death here on earth (if Jesus doesn't come back before then)?

First, I prefer James.2nd, do not put words in my mouth.3rd -I think for the first time, I am going to quote 'the bible'.

To the hebrew-believers in Rome, from the zealot-heretic Saul:

For those Elohim foreknew, also predestined to be conformed/transformed to the likeness of His Son { resurrected }, that Y`shua might be the firstborn among many brothers. And those predestined, also called; those called, also justified; those justified, also glorified...

note the keywords: firstborn from the dead; first-fruit of the Spirit...

In fact the entire paragraph of this letter (ch. 8) combined w/ the letter of Hebrews confirms exactly this point as does every single line of Torah.

Anyone know the Vav? And the broken Vav? might want to check it out. This is what Saul is again referencing.

Sorry, 21, but we can't close the gap between being human and being "God".......We are, and always will be (while our physical bodies are alive) humans subject to God's power.

And??? Adam was subject to Him, yet glorified -in body/mind/spirit.

Perhaps you think there was some other purpose to this 'salvation'?so do the keepers of the law of sin/death.

They would do even more things than that. They would do what He planned for all humans to do -be His glory, create as He instructed.unfortunately man thinks otherwise. Ironic.

Wrong, He didn't come to 'spritualize' anything. This was always the way, the truth, the light -the Word in us and us in it. This is why He is called the 2nd Adam. The 1st being righteous, accepted less -deceived into consciousness- by faith & law was found guilty of idolartry (putting another image between Creator and creation, a wedge of seperation, a hedge of thorns; By all points tried, convicted and sentenced to death because of it. But He being greater, made intercession on . our . behalf so we have no excuse, no reason to fear and boldly stand before the throne of Grace.

Why not just ask me? I was there, you know! Adam didn't really know he was eating the forbidden fruit. Eve tricked him into eating it and all men have suffered for it ever since. Yes I know, Adam and I got punished because Eve could not stand to be told no.

Now I can't wear shoes and men are still eating whatever women put in front of their faces, while the ladies....well, the more things change........

FTR, Brenda, in answer to your question: yes, on several occasions.again, not my own power but the Anointing Spirit.

my own mum, who was raised in an Arabic church. After numerous priests and scientists could do nothing...my wife, who was raised in a non-religious, military country and is in many ways an atheist...

as for the other events you mentioned, there is no reason why we cannot. If Elijah could run 40 miles an hour, destroy an entire cult of Baal priests, be transformed; if Enoch was able by faith alone, and so many others, so can we. Y`shua told us this Himself.

by law (which is physical) and prophecy (which is spirit) we are free in every way to do -and i quote- "greater works than these"

{ see also Rev 1 & 19 }

Clinging to the 'Old Rugged Cross' is only going to give folks splinters. The golden shackles they wear are shiny, but pointless.

I laugh because Moses must have gone through this too, when trying to show 3 millions slaves they were free. Why the Hebrew rulers of the law closed their ears and tore their robes. Why every single prophet was killed. And Y`shua Himself who just shook his head because of unbelief -even after He rose up from death.

No, no, no they keep shouting! Law, law, law! Sin, sin, sin; Death, death, death! And get what they keep asking for.Still stuck in the consciousness that leads to death. For some, a second death. At least the ones from the great tribulation are fortunate that they cannot face the second death.

You're too funny. The word chata'ah or Chatat was mistransliterated as SIN.The word chata'ah is the feminine word for chet. Chata'ah means an offering for an unintentional offense. It is an offense made by mistake and is not intentional chosen offenses.The Chata'ah shows sorrow for the offense.

The CH which is in Chet is pronounced Het and the feminine word for Chet is Chata'ah and the CH is pronounced Hah.(this is a soft sound from the throat)It is the same as the sound in Chanukkah (Khah nik uh) known to most as Han-noo-kah

The ' between the a a (a 'a) means that one a is pronounced the way it is when used at the beginning of a word and the other as it sounds at the end of the word. So together the a 'a is pronounced with a new slightly different sound of the a and the 'a combined.

The word Chata'ah is therefore pronounced Hah-Taht (That sounds like OT or Hah-Tah-Ot)

Not aw-aw..no such sound as aw aw in Hebrew.

This shows me what I've thought all along. You copy someone else's ERRORS on the internet and post them as your own. What you have posted is grossly incorrect.

a, you haven't corrected me in any way.b, Joel, you should stop writing under your wife's id. it is too obvious -just from your posting yesterday, noble, but obvious.c, if i was going to insult anyone, it would not be here on an internet thread, it would be face to face.

By the way, I don't need anyone to speak for me. Because I have never called you out on anything you thought I was in agreement with you which isn't true. I saw a different person in you yesterday and saw some misquoted stuff today so I told you about it. This has made you angry. I have always been blunt so your assumptions are wrong.

By comparing the NT to the Quran, one can find a great deal of contrasting beliefs and contradictions across both texts. And, although Islam does recognize Jesus as a prophet, it is only Muhammad that had the final "word of god" revealed to mankind.

As an answer to your first question, I kind of meant that the people who are in the spotlight who claim to be God's people are a lot different to the Martyrs and poor people who followed God in Biblical times..

I wouldn't class myself as part of a religion, I heard one song by Ziggy Marley yesterday which was quite nice 'Love is my Religion'

who is talking to me? the male or female side of the Ism.As for you agreeing or disagreeing with any of my posts -who cares. Why would I be angry at someone posting information on an internet thread makes no sense at all. Misquoting whom? I don't believe I have ever quoted you.

It's not Yah shua { unless you're from New Jersey } or have issue with speech like Moses did when talking to -oh yeah, Yah shua, his armor bearer/second man.

Yeshua, Y'shua, Y`sha etc etc are all common uses of that name. Yah shua is Joshua or Yahoshua from where that translation is said to come.

So it appears you are only trying to make your 'self' appear cool in the eyes of the hubbers. A pity since I personally have listened/read your information without bias or ego and will continue to do so. I find it amazing up to that 'oh so brief moment yesterday with your hubbie', your comments to my replies were never critical in any fashion or self serving.

What a dramatic irony has unfolded here ... Instead of the atheists arguing with one another, you have the believers arguing over how to interpret god's words ... which kind of proves the point Q was trying to make ... religions do diverge on belief ... and no ... that doesn't make sense, for reasons also given in this thread.

Here's a fine one I heard ... the meaning got corrupted over time ...

Really?

So ... Protestants and Lutherans diverged from Catholicism because they misheard some of the words? Actually, it's because they chose to believe differently - and for no other reason.

Now, keeping this in context, we are either to believe that religion evolves ...

*-* evolutionary religion ... I'm so gonna patent that phrase! *-*

... or the first and primary religion got it right and everyone has corrupted it since then to serve their own needs.

Going off all of this, then the first primary religion is the only one that has a chance at being right, which knocks out Christianity and Islam ... as these came later.

Now ... I ask ... what was the first religion? Was it Judaism? Was it Hinduism? Or was it something else?

Whatever it was ... only the very first religion has any chance of being right, as that would have been the religion handed down by god ... or whatever name might fall upon the first we worshiped.

And why must this be? Well, if god created Adam and Adam worshiped god, and Adam was the first human, then he created the original religion that revolved around worshiping god. Anything that occurs afterward is taken out of context and can't be trusted. After all, it was just god, Adam, and Eve back then, so Adam had at least 50% of God's attention, which means he would know exactly what God expected of him ... and yet ... he was the first one to sin (or perhaps the second, as Eve ate the apple first).

So, anyone know what the oldest recorded religion is? Anyone care to guess?

Just as they know you are misguided, Brenda. That is the crux of my inquiry which many here seem to just right off to misinterpretation and misunderstanding. Once again, Brenda, you encapsulate the problem in your post.

the core reason is based on the two tribes -Israel v Judah. The only two tribes to have kings. Israel claimed kingship of David, but prophetically, the true king would stem from Judah and not Israel himself. The remaining 10 tribes had kingdoms but no king (see rev 17).

Thus many Hebrews who say David as their king await the coming of Moshiach, The King. They refused Y`shua as king because of his humility, the way they perceived his coming, as of Judah a lion.

Much of the dispute lays in the Zayir { crowned man aka king }.Even still many Hebrews excitedly accept because they know what it means. The majority of Mosaic or Noah Hebrew followers refuse because of the law itself. Removal of law displaced them, made them and their works seem pointless/needless. Even though they had the prophets and examples -mentioned in the letter of Hebrews, etc.

There is much more to it than what Christianity teaches, especially with regard to Revelations and assumed 2nd coming, which is not actually a physical event, when read from Hebrew perspective. The Zayin is already crowned, He is King of all.It is truly beautiful, pictorial and shout-worthy!.

Twenty One Days ... There is much more to it than what Christianity teaches, especially with regard to Revelations and assumed 2nd coming, which is not actually a physical event, when read from Hebrew perspective. The Zayin is already crowned, He is King of all.Its beautiful, pictorial and shout-worthy!.

Jerami said What ever the second coming of Christ is to be, I think that it cAme as he said that it would. "This generation shall not pass till all these things be fulfilled" but no one know the DAY or hour. but at some time in that Generation.

Indeed Jerami.It did happen in that generation -the death/resurrection.Not coincidentally, in Revelation, it says: ehyeh asher ehyeh 'in the clouds' meaning I am I, in the covering or covered in glory.

Clouds represent covering, as in the 'cloud by day', 'cloud of witnesses', 'cloud in the Tabernacle', 'cloud on Mount Sinai', signifying the GLORY of the resurrection, glory of Elohim.

The Hebrew translation is the same in all instances from which John is speaking. PLUS, it is a present event -not past or future, noted at the beginning and end of the vision.

There are many diffrent prospectives that scripture can be seen from. people should be able to look at them from at least three diffrent prospectives; Kinda like the triangualation method used with radar to find the exact location of an object. One single view should not be trusted.

All to often our minds can not see three dimentionaly, Seeing three diffrent views of the same object or issue. Until we can do this, we can be said to be closed minded. And never agree with "anyone" unless they agree with us.

Sometimes not always ... the middle of the road is the proper place to be. As long as we are there "NOT" cause it is easiest, but because we see with a broad enough of vision and see that is where we are suposed to be.

from adam to moses, david, the prophets, the judges, the temple, the devil, death, sin, hell, fire and brimstone -all finished.

time to become that glory.else, let the man return to the dust he came, so at least his spirit is not lost.

if they want captivity, so they'll get it...if they live by sword, they'll die by it...but, if they live by 'every word that proceeds from the mouth of Elohim' -that is the breathe of Life, the Spirit of prophecy {the glorified Word & Testimony of Y`shua } they shall not die but have Life.

Hmmm we werent there when all the relegions began and books of the bible were written. How do we know its not all B.S. and made up by crazy people, ask yourselves that then reply! I believe this is were your personal faith comes in, what you religiously stand for! Just be true to yourself, follow the golden rule and you'll be alright.

There is just one main message and rule from all of the religions/god and that is to be good and get along with everyone else... The rest is just bullshit made up by people in an attempt to control other people!!!

I think you are mistaken; one has to be good to others because it emanates from believing in ONEGOD- the Creator-God Allah YHWH and believing in His Prophets Messengers chosen by Him; only then one abstains from following the Devil and doing mischief to others.

Some people think that if they disagree with the Religion is teaching then they are turning their back on their God. That isn't true From now on when I try my hand at making up a parable I will declare the fact by numbering it.

parable # 247 ... Ya do not have to jump out of the fishing boat just cause ya want a different fishing poles.

I don't think you understood my statement, because your response is way off. Why can't you just lose the fear of the bible-and the concept that it is the inspired word of god?

You can't lose the fear, so all you do is rationalize. What you are rebelling against is ORGANIZED religion, but to state that you are not religious, while believing in the same bible that organized religions believe in, is illogical.

The bible is not the inspired word of god, no matter how much energy one uses to rationalize this utterly absurd concept.

I am not a scientist either but I understand and believe some of what I read in their books.

I know enough about the bible to know that to better understand what we are reading ya caint start in the middle and run around in circles gathering enough information to understand it properly. You will either get dizzy or lost.

That is my biggest complaint with religion. It teaches us to run in circles attempting to find what is right in front of us. That in turn makes me ask myself WHY?

I believe that so many children would grow up smarter and having a better intillecual veiw on the world if society didn't shove religion down their throtes. There are many good religious people who are smart, but if...

There are so many religions in the world and yet there are those who believe in nothing but themselfs, and yet those that believe in God live as though they dont believe , just by the way they live, and the things they...

Just to see what people think from different religions. Please tell me what religion you are If you are okay with that and then answer the simple question of "Do you believe you should PUSH your religion on your...

No explanation needed...Say 'Yes' if you do & Say 'No' if you dont.'Hate'...may not be the appropriate word here but I couldnt come up with another one in the title & Im extremely sorry for that. Its not...

The common thought running through all religions? is this, we are the true religion. So if that the common thought how do we know which religion is the true one? I truely believe one is the true religion, but, it is...